Houston & T. C. R'y Co. v. Simpson

Citations

• 60 Tex. 103
• 1883 Tex. LEXIS 273

Syllabus

<p>1. Negligence.— In a suit by a child for damages claimed on account of injuries inflicted by a turn-table of a railway company, after the court had properly instructed the jury as to the degree of care to avoid injury requisite in a child, it was not error to give the following charge: “ If you believe, from the evidence, that the plaintiff had intelligence enough to appreciate the peril of getting on the defendant’s turn-table in the manner the evidence shows he did; or if you believe he was warned by defendant’s employee not to get on said table, and that it was dangerous to do so, and said plaintiff understood and appreciated such warning, but did nevertheless get on said turn-table, and was thereby the direct cause of his injury, you will find for defendant.”</p> <p>2. Same.— See opinion for charge on the same subject held to have been properly refused.•</p> <p>8. Same—Charge of court.— The question of due care, when negligence is charged against a railway company on account of leaving its turn-table unfastened, is one for the jury; and a charge that the failure of the company to fasten its table under a condition of facts stated would be negligence, would be an invasion of the province of the jury, and was properly refused.</p> <p>4. Negligence.—The law fixes no certain age at which children are of sufficient intelligence to have imposed upon them the full degree of care incumbent on those of mature age, and in every case the question of the intelligence of a child is one for the jury.</p> <p>5. Pact case — Damages.— See opinion for facts under which the court refused to disturb a verdict for §3,500 against a railway company for injuries sustained by a child ten years old at its turn-table.</p>